Emerging Adulthood:

Theory, Assessment and Application

Alan Reifman
Human Development and Family Studies
Texas Tech University
alan.reifman@ttu.edu

Jeffrey Jensen Arnett

Clark University
Worcester, Massachusetts

Malinda J. Colwell
Human Development and Family Studies
Texas Tech University
Volume 2, Number 1, Summer 2007 Article 0701FA003

Emerging Adulthood:
Theory, Assessment and Application

Alan Reifman and Malinda J. Colwell

Texas Tech University

Jeffrey Jensen Arnett

Clark University

Abstract: The later attainment of traditional adult roles by today’s youth

compared to their counterparts of earlier decades has garnered
considerable scholarly and public attention. This article describes a recent
concept related to the transition to adulthood, known as emerging
adulthood, including a discussion of relevant theory and historical
background research. We then introduce a measurement instrument, the
Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA), which
assesses identification with transition-to-adulthood themes. Results of
initial scale-development studies were largely supportive of the measure’s
reliability and validity. Respondents in their 20s identified with relevant
themes to a greater extent than did their younger and older counterparts.
Marital status differences on the IDEA emerged, but college and non-
college respondents were largely similar. Finally, we provide suggestions
for how parent educators can make use of the IDEA instrument in advising
parents and their emerging adult children.

Introduction

Many markers of the transition to adulthood, such as median age of first marriage, are being
reached at older ages now than in the past (Arnett, 2004a). Futhermore, large numbers of
young people (sometimes referred to as “boomerang kids”) are moving back in with their
parents while exploring career directions, a phenomenon gaining the attention of parenting
educators (Bold, 2001). In this context, the transition to adulthood has attracted great interest,
both from academic researchers (Arnett, 2000; Dwyer & Wyn, 2001; Furlong & Cartmel, 1997)
and writers for a popular audience (Karlin & Borofsky, 2003; Robbins & Wilner, 2001).
Arnett (2000, 2004a, 2004b) has proposed that the time of life roughly between ages 18-25 be
considered a “distinct period” called emerging adulthood (EA). Essentially, this is a time when
individuals tend to consider themselves too old to be adolescents, but not yet full-fledged
adults. According to Arnett (2000):
“Having left the dependency of childhood and adolescence, and having not yet entered
the enduring responsibilities that are normative in adulthood, emerging adults often
explore a variety of possible life directions in love, work, and worldviews” (p. 469).
As reviewed by Arnett (2000), emerging adulthood is thought to carry its own constellation of
demographic and psychological correlates.

Several other earlier theorists have proposed ideas about the developmental characteristics of a
period that follows adolescence but is not fully adult. It is well known that Erikson (1968)
proposed that identity is the central developmental issue of adolescence. He also commented
on the “prolonged adolescence” typical of industrialized societies, and the psychosocial
moratorium granted to young people in such societies, “during which the young adult through
free role experimentation may find a niche in some section of his society” (p. 150).

Keniston (1970) proposed the term “youth” for a period between adolescence and young
adulthood, but his ideas were based mainly on college student protesters of the late 1960s and
are highly reflective of that historical time rather than of any enduring characteristics of the age
period. Arnett’s theory takes into account the social and demographic changes that have taken
place in the decades since Erikson and Keniston proposed their theories, such as later ages of
marriage and parenthood, broadened participation in higher education, and greater tolerance of
premarital sexual activity and cohabitation (Arnett, 1998, 2000, 2004a).

The authors cited above who have written contemporaneously with Arnett (Dwyer & Wyn,
2001; Furlong & Cartmel, 1997; Karlin & Borofsky, 2003; Robbins & Wilner, 2001) have
identified many of the same themes as he has, such as the freedom, exploration, and
unpredictability of the transition to adulthood. Dwyer and Wyn, and Furlong and Cartmel, who
have focused on Western nations beyond the U.S. They also go beyond Arnett in certain ways,
such as consideration of public policy towards individuals in the transition to adulthood (e.g., in
housing and education). Robbins and Wilner have also focused more on the psychological-
distress aspect of this transition than have other writers. Nonetheless, these authors have all
converged on a set of themes, despite coming from different countries and perspectives (i.e.,
academic and non-academic).

Arnett’s Theory

Arnett’s theory is based on research with young people who have grown up in an environment
characterized by these changes, so it may reflect the experiences of young people today in a
way that earlier theories do not. However, the five features of emerging adulthood proposed by
Arnett (2004a, 2004b) were based on qualitative data from wide-ranging structured interviews.
The present paper investigates the empirical validity of Arnett’s five features of emerging
adulthood by presenting a scale that was designed to investigate them and to test whether
these features are more prominent during emerging adulthood than at other ages, as proposed
by Arnett (2004a, 2004b).
 Proposed Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood

Arnett has continued to flesh out the dimensions of EA beyond his initial (Arnett, 2000)
exposition on the topic; more recently, he has proposed that EA is characterized by five
distinctive features:
• the age of identity explorations,
• the age of instability,
• the self-focused age,
• the age of feeling in-between,
• the age of possibilities (Arnett, 2004a, 2004b).

According to Arnett, emerging adulthood is the age of identity explorations because the
psychosocial moratorium Erikson (1968) described is now normative and takes place in
emerging adulthood. Emerging adulthood is the age of feeling in-between because the majority
of emerging adults feel they are no longer adolescents but not yet fully adults (Arnett, 1998,
2001).

It is the age of possibilities because it tends to be an optimistic time of life, as a variety of

potential mates, job opportunities, social causes, and other commitments are perceived by
emerging adults as being available.

As emerging adults explore these possibilities, they concomitantly take on greater independence
and responsibility for themselves compared to when they were younger, yet with a sense of
considerable personal freedom remaining; these qualities comprise another of the dimensions,
namely that of the self-focused age.

The independence, responsibility, and freedom of emerging adulthood are not complete,
however. Using the example of going away to college, a common experience in emerging
adulthood, students’ discretion regarding their time usage, activities, and peer associations
would likely be greater than when they lived at home, although many students’ parents may be
the ones paying the tuition. Arnett (2000) cited Goldscheider and Davanzo’s (1986) term
“semiautonomy” in this context. Arnett (2004a) summarizes the notion of a self-focused age in
terms of how individuals “focus on themselves as they develop the knowledge, skills, and self-
understanding they will need for adult life” (p. 14).

Whereas the four dimensions listed thus far all appear to refer in a relatively favorable light to
experiences of exploring life options and “moving up” to adulthood, it is also likely that
emerging adults will experience negative aspects of the transition. The sheer number of
available choices and choice-points at which decisions must be made could make individuals
feel overwhelmed (Robbins & Wilner, 2001). Further, change is itself unsettling, and some
individuals may lack (or feel they lack) the confidence and wherewithal to succeed. This facet
of emerging adulthood refers to the age of instability.

Research Topics for a Measure of Emerging Adulthood

Some researchers have used the terms “emerging adulthood” or “emerging adults” to refer to
the (roughly) 18-25 age group as a whole, much like one would use terms such as
“adolescents” and “adults” to denote specific age groups (Shiner, Masten, & Tellegen, 2002).
Yet, researchers may also wish to explore individual differences in self-identification with the
processes of EA, either between or within broad age groups. The present paper thus
introduces the Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA), an instrument
designed to measure such individual differences. In developing the IDEA, we generated items
designed to map onto the aforementioned five dimensions. An additional dimension, known as
other-focus, was also developed; though not part of the primary conceptualization of EA, it
represents a counterpoint to self-focus.

Initial reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) and validity information on the IDEAis
presented. The latter includes comparisons on the EA dimensions by age, educational status,
and role occupancy (e.g., spouse). Individuals in the roughly 18-25 age range are hypothesized
to score higher on EA than individuals of other ages. Those who are attending school and those
who have not yet married – and thus are exploring in the areas of career plans and/or
prospective mates – are also expected to score high.

For further validity information, we examine the relationship of the EA dimensions to various
psychological variables. We hypothesize that these EA dimensions (other than instability) will
correlate positively with life satisfaction, self-mastery (internal control over one’s life), novelty-
seeking, future orientation, and imagination of possible selves. Secondly, we investigate
whether young people’s experience of parental control (e.g., rules) would be associated with a
dampening of the exploration associated with EA or perhaps an enhancement of it as young
people reacted against previous parental constraints. In addition, the EA dimensions could be
used in future research to predict individuals’ other behaviors, such as risky substance use or
frequency of changing college majors (Arnett, 2000).

Implications of Emerging Adulthood for Practice

Bold (2001) discussed factors that could affect parents’ reactions to young-adult children
moving back in with them. Education of parents on the concept of emerging adulthood could
give parents added understanding of their children’s life choices and delays in accomplishment
of traditional adult roles. Some parent educators may find it sufficient to simply present
information on EA, whereas others may wish to go further and make our IDEA questionnaire
available to parents to administer to their young-adult children. Parent educators, parents, and
young-adult children could then discuss their answers.

Method

The methods and results of our studies are described briefly in the following sections. A longer
manuscript providing greater detail in these areas is available upon request from the authors.

Procedures
All studies were based at a state university in Texas, the larger community of which is a small
city located near more rural, agricultural areas. Convenience samples were used. For the
studies in which we sought to compare different age groups, students in an undergraduate
research methodology course administered surveys to acquaintances, friends, and family
members who fell into the relevant age categories. For test-retest reliability, we administered
surveys to students in the same class twice, and for the college/non-college comparison,
students in a class completed surveys themselves and administered them to non-college
acquaintances of theirs. These studies received human subjects approval at the host university.
Samples
Demographics were assessed in all samples, except those used for the very brief test-retest and
college/non-college studies. Females comprised 57-66% of the samples in which demographics
were assessed, whereas samples were from 72.5-87% white.

Measures
The following measures were each used with one or more of the samples:
• The 31-item Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA), an electronic
copy of which is available at: http://www.hs.ttu.edu/hd3317/IDEA.htm.
• The brief (five-item) Satisfaction with Life Scale (Pavot & Diener, 1993).
• An instrument measuring self-mastery (i.e., feelings of being in control of events in
one’s life; Marshall & Lang, 1990; Pearlin & Schooler, 1978).
• A modified version of Cross and Markus’s (1991) measure of people’s envisioned
possible future selves.
• A modified version (Reifman & Lacey, 2000) of the 12-item Consideration of Future
Consequences Scale (CFC); (Strathman, Gleicher, Boninger, & Edwards, 1994), which
measures future orientation.
• The Arnett Inventory of Sensation Seeking (Arnett, 1994), which was used to measure
novelty seeking.
• A measure we developed from the literature (Busby, Holman, & Taniguchi, 2001;
National Center for Education Statistics, 2001) to measure parental control, in terms of
the degree to which parents made decisions for their children, had extensive rules for
them, and checked on whether they were completing various tasks and requirements.

Results

Key findings, focusing on statistically significant results, are summarized briefly in three sections
below: scale development and psychometrics, demographic/role comparisons, and correlations
with other constructs (convergent validity).

Scale Development and Psychometrics

• Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses largely supported the proposed five-
subscale conceptualization of emerging adulthood, plus the other-focused
supplementary subscale. In two studies combined, only five item loadings smaller then
.45 were obtained. Some of the subscales did exhibit large correlations (r > .7) with
each other, however.
• Internal consistency (alpha) reliability coefficients for the subscales were generally
strong, between .70-.85. Test-retest reliability correlations (over a one-month interval)
ranged from .64-.76, with the exception of the “feeling in-between” subscale (.37).

Demographic/Role Comparisons
• In comparing the age groups 18-23, 24-29, 30-39, 40-49, and 50-plus, identity
exploration, experimentation/possibilities, and negativity/instability (in both samples
containing these ages), and self-focus (in one sample) all were highest in the 18-23 age
group and declined with older age. Other-focus (in one sample) exhibited the opposite
pattern.
• In another of our studies, individuals in the purported emerging adulthood age range
(college students and graduates) scored higher than did younger respondents (6th-12th
grade) on identity exploration, other-focus, self-focus, and feeling in-between.
• Never-married individuals between 18-29 years old were compared to their age-matched
engaged/married counterparts in two samples. Never-marrieds were found to be higher
in identity exploration (in one sample), experimentation/possibilities (in both samples),
and self-focus (in one sample), but lower in other-focus (in both samples) than the
engaged-married group.
• Other comparisons tested EA differences among 18-29 year-olds according to
employment, living arrangements, and education. The longer hours one worked, the
greater the degree of other-focus and the less the feelings of experimentation.
Respondents who totally paid their own expenses had the greatest sense of other-focus,
whereas their counterparts who paid none of their own expenses had the least.
Individuals living with friends were highest on experimentation and those with a
partner/spouse lowest; individuals living with a partner/spouse scored highest on other-
focus and those in a dormitory lowest; and individuals living with friends or alone scored
highest on self-focus and those living in a dormitory lowest. Identity exploration,
experimentation/possibilities, and negativity/instability all increased when respondents
felt that their chosen career path required greater education, whereas other-focus went
down.
• We also tested for potential gender, race/ethnicity, and social class differences on the
EA dimensions. Because we had no a priori predictions regarding gender differences on
the IDEA, we limit our reporting to findings that replicated in more than one study. In
two samples, females scored significantly higher than did males on self-focus. No
significant differences were found between white and Hispanic respondents’ means in
any of three samples (other racial/ethnic groups had too few cases). Self-reported
working class respondents scored highest on negativity/instability and upper-
middle/upper class ones lowest; the groups also differed on self-focus, with working
class respondents lowest and middle and upper-middle/upper class groups at about the
same, higher level.
• Only one significant difference was obtained between college students and their similar-
age non-college counterparts, as the former exceeded the latter on sense of
experimentation/possibilities.
 Figure 1
Age-Group Differences on Identity-Exploration Subscale,
in Original and Replication Studies

4
Study 1 Study 2
3.5
3
2.5

2
1.5

1
0.5

0
18-23 24-29 30-39 40-49 50+
 Figure 2

Differences on All IDEA Subscales,

in Emerging-Adult and Younger Respondents
4
6th-12th College students & grads
3.5 graders

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Identity Explor.

Experimentation

Negativity

Other-Focused

Self-Focused

In-Between

Significant Correlations with Other Constructs

• Individuals scoring highly on negativity/instability were low in life satisfaction (r = -.38).
The other-focus subscale was positively related to life satisfaction (r = .16).
• Individuals reporting high negativity/instability exhibited a low sense of mastery over
one’s life (r = -.35).
• Greater self-characterization as being in an identity-exploration time of life was
associated with a greater number of hoped-for possible selves (r = .34), as was the
perception of experiencing negativity and instability (r = .35). Greater identity
exploration was associated with a higher percentage of possible selves in the
occupational domain (r = .25), but a lower percentage in the family domain (r = -.25).
Greater self-focus was associated with a higher percentage of selves in the leisure
domain (r = .25).
• Future orientation had modest, but consistent, positive correlations with a number of
IDEA subscales: identity exploration (r = .20), experimentation/possibilities (r = .22),
other-focus (r = .29), and self-focus (r = .23).
• None of the subscales was significantly correlated with novelty seeking.
 • Higher scores on the general parental-authority subscale (i.e., greater parental assertion
and less child initiative) were associated with lower identity exploration (r = -.24) and
self-focus (r = -.25) in adolescent and college-age children. None of the subscales was
correlated with the task-specific parental rules subscale.

Discussion
This paper has described the concept of emerging adulthood, provided a measure of it, and
suggested how parent educators can make use of it. Initial findings appear to support Arnett’s
(2000) conceptualization. Most importantly, 18-29 year-olds tended to have the highest (or
lowest) means on various IDEA dimensions compared to other age groups, in accordance with
EA theory. Other demographic/role comparisons (e.g., marital/relationship status) also were
consistent with the EA framework. The IDEA subscales also appeared to have a reasonable
factor structure, generally strong reliability, and some meaningful correlations with existing
constructs in the literature.

For practitioners, however, the main value of the IDEA instrument is likely to be in helping
parent educators advise parents and their children who are going through the transition to
adulthood. Our findings (and those of future researchers) should help normalize families’
experiences of their children’s transition to adulthood and enhance their understanding of the
explorations being exhibited by these children. Adult children moving back home thus should
not necessarily be viewed by parents as their children rebelling or “slacking.” Prolonged
exploration may stem from deeper reasons.

Arnett (2000, 2004b) discusses several possible reasons for the later attainment of traditional
adult roles such as marriage and parenthood by today’s youth, compared to their counterparts
of previous decades. There are structural reasons, such as greater amounts of education being
required for high-technology jobs and the invention of the birth-control pill. However, Arnett
(2004b) feels that the most important reason has to do with attitude and outlook:

There has been a profound change in how young people view the meaning and value of
becoming an adult and entering the adult roles of spouse and parent. Young people of
the 1950s were eager to enter adulthood and “settle down.” Perhaps because they grew
up during the upheavals of the Great Depression and World War II, achieving the stability
of marriage, home, and children seemed like a great accomplishment to them...

The young people of today, in contrast, see adulthood and its obligations in quite a
different light. In their late teens and early twenties, marriage, home, and children are
seen by most of them not as achievements to be pursued but as perils to be avoided. It is
not that they do not want marriage, a home, and (one or two) children—eventually. Most
of them do want to take on all of these adult obligations, and most of them will have
done so by the time they reach age 30. It is just that, in their late teens and early
twenties, they ponder these obligations and think, “Yes, but not yet” (p. 6).

Connections between parenting and emerging adult children’s exploration can be examined
from additional angles, as well. Our study of adolescents and early 20s individuals in one of our
samples investigated parental control. Although correlational (and especially retrospective)
data do not allow causal inference, our results suggest the possibility that parents’ failure to
allow autonomy to develop in their children may dampen the latter’s experience of EA-relevant
perceptions and sense of future orientation. Also, McCourt (2004) found that college students
who scored highly on overall EA exhibited higher alcohol use/misuse and more problematic
body-image issues and watched more television programs with thin characters than their lower
EA-scoring counterparts. Thus, there could be health-related consequences of EA-related
exploration.

Conclusion
In conclusion, emerging adulthood has been an active area of research for the past five years.
We hope that it can also be extended to parent education and other community applications.
Such applications of research findings from the IDEA instrument could include:
• Material to supplement parenting education pamphlets and informational websites for
parents and emerging adults
• Career advising for emerging adults
• Information for health educators in colleges and other settings to help channel emerging
adults’ tendencies for exploration and experimentation into healthy, positive directions,
as opposed to health-compromising risky behavior.

References
Arnett, Jeffrey. (1994). Sensation seeking: A new conceptualization and a new scale.
Personality and Individual Differences, 16 (2), 289-296.

Arnett, Jeffrey J. (1998). Learning to stand alone: The contemporary American transition to
adulthood in cultural and historical context. Human Development, 41 (5-6), 295-315.

Arnett, Jeffrey J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens
through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55 (5), 469-480.

Arnett, Jeffrey J. (2001). Conceptions of the transition to adulthood: Perspectives from

adolescence through midlife. Journal of Adult Development, 8 (2), 133-143.

Arnett, Jeffrey J. (2004a). Adolescence and emerging adulthood: A cultural approach (2nd ed.).
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.

Arnett, Jeffrey J. (2004b). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through
the twenties. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bold, Mary. (2001). Boomerang Kids. On-line: http://www.unt.edu/cpe/module1/blk5boom.htm.

Busby, Dean M., Holman, Thomas B., & Taniguchi, Narumi. (2001). RELATE: Relationship
evaluation of the individual, family, cultural, and couple contexts. Family Relations, 50 (4), 308-
316.

Cross, Susan, & Markus, Hazel. (1991). Possible selves across the life span. Human
Development, 34 (4), 230-255.

Dwyer, Peter, & Wyn, Johanna. (2001). Youth, education and risk: Facing the future. London:
Routledge/Falmer.

Erikson, Erik H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
Furlong, Andy, & Cartmel, Fred. (1997). Young people and social change: Individualization and
risk in late modernity. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Goldscheider, Frances K., & Davanzo, Julie. (1986). Semiautonomy and leaving home in early
adulthood. Social Forces, 65 (1), 187-201.

Karlin, Jennifer, & Borofsky, Amelia. (Eds.) (2003). ReGeneration: Telling stories from our
twenties. New York: Tarcher/Putnam.

Keniston, Kenneth. (1970). Youth: A “new” stage of life. American Scholar, 39 (Autumn), 631-
654.

Marshall, Grant N., & Lang, Eric L. (1990). Optimism, self-mastery, and symptoms of depression
in women professionals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (1), 132-139.

McCourt, Andrea E. (2004). Identity exploration, media usage, and health behaviors.
Unpublished dissertation, Texas Tech University.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). National Education Longitudinal Study, 1988.
Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.

Pavot, William., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological
Assessment, 5 (2), 164-172.

Pearlin Leonard I., & Schooler Carmi. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 19 (1), 2-21.

Reifman, Alan., & Lacey, Rachel. S. (2000, March-April). Age differences in propensity to
consider future consequences: A focus on adolescence. Paper presented at the 8th Biennial
Meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Chicago.

Robbins, Alexandra & Wilner, Abby. (2001). Quarterlife crisis: The unique challenges of life in
your twenties. New York: Tarcher/Putnam.

Shiner, Rebecca L., Masten, Ann S., & Tellegen, Auke. (2002). A developmental perspective on
personality in emerging adulthood: Childhood antecedents and concurrent adaptation. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 83 (5), 1165-1177.

Strathman, Alan, Gleicher, Faith, Boninger, David S., & Edwards, C. Scott. (1994). The
consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 (4), 742-752.
4

Acknowledgments
An earlier version of this manuscript was presented at the 111th Annual Convention of the American
Psychological Association, August 2003, Toronto, Canada. We would like to thank the student assistants
who helped with managing the data files: Karin Doederlein, Penny Gonzalez, Tamsen Harsch, Sarah
Hendley and Qingfang Song.
_________________________________________________________________
© Copyright of Journal of Youth Development ~ Bridging Research and Practice. Content may not be copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv without copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download or email
articles for individual use.